He has indicated that retirement is not far off for him he's made enough to live out his life in comfort, and desires to remain health for most of that span of time.
He reaps great praise for his considerable success in the ring, with many calling him an all-time great.
I wouldn't dream of trying to diminish his standing. Hes earned the applause of the industry.
But as an historian, I am aware of the real neaning of ATG.
And so I have to ask:
Pro:
With an incredible 396-1 amateur record and 2 Olympic golds and 2 world championships, he is one of the best amateurs ever.
As a pro, he's gained world titles in 3 weight classes and unified some.
He is a fantastic fighter.
Con:
He's 17-3-0 with just 11 stoppage wins.
Hardly the typical hall of fame numbers we expect.
If Vasiliy Lomachenko is truly a great for all the ages, what separates him and his body of work at 126 - 135 from his contemporaries, like Teofimo Lopez, Oscar Valdez, Gervonta Davis, Ryan Garcia, Naoya Inoue, Sandor Martin, Devin Haney, Subriel Matias, Isaac Cruz, Gary Russell Jr, Shakur Stevenson, Leo Santa Cruz, Javier Fortuna, Takashi Uchiyama, Francisco Vargas, Yuriorkis Gamboa, Lamont Roach, Jorge Linares, Jhonny Gonzalez, Nonito Donaire, Josh Warrington, Omar Figueroa, George Kambosos Jr, Miguel Berchelt, Etc.
Is Lomachenko discernibly BETTER than all of those? Most of those? Or only about half?
Lomachenko's work has been more than commendable, but this can be said of many in the 126 to 135 bracket during the past decade too.
Does he REALLY stand out as trancending his competitors to rise to an authentic all-time great?
He reaps great praise for his considerable success in the ring, with many calling him an all-time great.
I wouldn't dream of trying to diminish his standing. Hes earned the applause of the industry.
But as an historian, I am aware of the real neaning of ATG.
And so I have to ask:
Pro:
With an incredible 396-1 amateur record and 2 Olympic golds and 2 world championships, he is one of the best amateurs ever.
As a pro, he's gained world titles in 3 weight classes and unified some.
He is a fantastic fighter.
Con:
He's 17-3-0 with just 11 stoppage wins.
Hardly the typical hall of fame numbers we expect.
If Vasiliy Lomachenko is truly a great for all the ages, what separates him and his body of work at 126 - 135 from his contemporaries, like Teofimo Lopez, Oscar Valdez, Gervonta Davis, Ryan Garcia, Naoya Inoue, Sandor Martin, Devin Haney, Subriel Matias, Isaac Cruz, Gary Russell Jr, Shakur Stevenson, Leo Santa Cruz, Javier Fortuna, Takashi Uchiyama, Francisco Vargas, Yuriorkis Gamboa, Lamont Roach, Jorge Linares, Jhonny Gonzalez, Nonito Donaire, Josh Warrington, Omar Figueroa, George Kambosos Jr, Miguel Berchelt, Etc.
Is Lomachenko discernibly BETTER than all of those? Most of those? Or only about half?
Lomachenko's work has been more than commendable, but this can be said of many in the 126 to 135 bracket during the past decade too.
Does he REALLY stand out as trancending his competitors to rise to an authentic all-time great?
Comment